ML20195F177

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Assessment of Region V Implementation of Const Insp Program in Conjunction W/Const Appraisal Team (Cat) Insps. Insp Results Documented in Cat Insp Rept 50-530/86-03
ML20195F177
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Palo Verde
Issue date: 05/30/1986
From: Partlow J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To: Kirsch D
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
Shared Package
ML20151J031 List:
References
FOIA-87-866 NUDOCS 8606100453
Download: ML20195F177 (28)


See also: IR 05000530/1986003

Text

~

,

.-

e

-

May 30,1986

MEMORANDUM FOR:

D. F. Kirsch, Director

Division of Reactor Safety and Projects, Region V

-

FROM:

J. G. Partlow, Director

.

Division of Inspection Programs

Office of Inspection and Enforcement

SUBJECT:

ASSESSMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NRC INSPECTION

PROGRAM BY REGION V AT PALO VERDE UNIT 3

The Office of Inspection and Enforcement described to the Commission in

SECY-82-150A the assessment of the implementation of the NRC inspection

program in conjunction with Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) inspections.

Accordingly, we have examined Region V's implementation of the construction

inspection program based on the January-February 1986 CAT inspection at the

Palo Verde Unit 3 site.

The results of the inspection were documented in

Inspection Report 50-530/86-03 dated April 4, 1986.

The enclosure to this

memorandum documents the results of our assessment of the construction

inspection program implementation,

i

,

,

ORIGittAL SIGa..

w % & t # tilh w

J. G. Partlow, Director

l

Division of Inspection Programs

Office of Inspection and Enforcement

Enclosure:

Assessment

'

cc:

J. Taylor, IE

Distribution

0C5-016

RCPB R/F

l

DI R/F /

'

J. Partlow

R. Spessard

R. Heishman

M. Peranich

H. Wong

gg g . P7- F44

4//t,

Y

l

&

C

r

,

OFC :ES:IE

'R

B;'01: IE :RC9: 01:IE :DD:DI:lE

0IR:01:
E

..................

..........................................p ............................

NAME :HWong/vjj

Peranich

RHeishman
RSpessard
JPartT)

.................y ...................................................:.............:...........

DATE :05/M/86

t05[/86

05/['86

$05/ /86

iO5/ /86

$

$

.

1.$

Ul

f

30

sc,yL f W

A-

28(f '

l

'

..

--

-

_

. .

- - - - _ -

-

._. .

_

_ .

__

_

.

__

..

.

.

REGInNAL CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION

PROGRAM ASSESSMENT - OUTLINE

FOR PALO VERDE UNIT 3

1.

Objective

j

II.

Assessment Activities

III. Assessment Findings

A.

Discipline Areas

1.

CAT Findings

,

2.

Assessment

3.

Recommendations

I

IV.

Review of Construction Inspection Program

,

A.

Scope

B.

Assessment

,

C.

Recommendations

'

V.

SALP Reports

VI.

Regional Assessment of 1985

'

VII. Overall Assessment Lonclusions

d

i

4

I

'

.

l

'

.

__

. _ .

-

.

._.

-

. - .

.-.-

.

.

.A

REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM

ASSESSMENT - PALO VERDE UNIT 3 (R-V)

.

1.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this assessment is to evaluate Region V's implementation

i

of the Light Water Reactor Inspection Program-Construction Phase

(construction inspection program) and to make an overall assessment of

the adequacy of Region V's oversight of construction activities at the

'

Palo Verde Unit 3 site.

The Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) of the Division of Inspection

Programs conducted an announced construction inspection at the Arizona

Nuclear Power Project's Palo Verde Unit 3 site during the period of

January 13-24 and February 3-14, 1986. While the predominant effort of

the inspection team was devoted to hardware inspection, the team also

evaluated the control of design changes and corrective actions.

,

II. ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES

,

A review was made of Region V inspection reports of the Palo Verde Unit

l

3 site, SALP reports, and construction deficiency reports to identify

those deficiencies that were previously identified by Region V inspec-

'

tors or *he licensee.

The review included inspection reports of approxi-

mately 1980 to 1985, applicable open items and violations and SALP reports

I

for July 1981 - February 1983, March 1983 - March 1984, and April 1984 -

September 1985.

'

To determine the inspection effort at Palo Verde Unit 3, the inspection

reports for 1975 through 1985 and the 766 Computer System inspection data

were analyzed.

It was determined that Region V performed a total of

3990 manhours (January 1,1975 - December 31, 1985) of direct inspection

!

,

effort at Palo Verde Unit 3 as documented in the 766 System on March 20,

1986.

,

'

The site total construction inspection hours were compared to other sites

1

(Catawba Unit 2, Byron Unit 2, and Palo Verde Unit 2) considered to be in

a similar stage of construction and the manhours were found to be

comparable, thus indicating a satisfactory level of inspection effort at

the site. Attachment I graphically depicts the comparison of inspection

hours. The analysis of the inspection reports and 766 Computer System

,

'

data indicated that the construction inspection program was approximately

90-95 percent complete at the start of the CAT inspection.

,

It should be noted that two sets of inspection hours are referenced in

.

this assessment due to the time frame in which the data was obtained from

the 766 data system.

Both sets are consistent, however, one set has been

1

used to compare other similar sites and the other is used in

!

assessing the inspection program effort solely at Palo Verde Unit 3.

The Executive Summary and Potential Enforcement Actions of the Palo Verde

Unit 3 CAT inspection report (50-530/86-03) are provided as Appendix A

,

"

and Appendix B, respectively.

l

'

__

-

- _ _

--

- _ .

_ _ _ , , _

_.

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . -

.

- _.__ _ -

.

.

.

.

,

0

I

i

III. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS

\\

'

A.

Electrical and Instrumentation Construction

1.

CAT Findinas

The NRC CAT identified a number of raceway installations

I

that did not meet the specified separation criteria.

The

licensee's inspection program for separation had not been

completed, so its adequacy could not be evaluated.

i

Configuration deficiencies in welded connections were

identified by the NRC CAT in some cable tray hanger

!

connections and in the mounting of a large proportion of

1

electrical equipment.

Previously, several reinspections

f

had been conducted by the licensee for various aspects of

-

cable tray hangers.

The quality of vendor terminations in the diesel generator

control panels and soldered connections in the 125V de

,

battery chargers were found to be inadequate.

The QC verification of in process excore cable terminations

was found to be inadequate.

The qualification for several components in the diesel

generator control panels and certain wire types in motor

operated valves requires additional review.

2.

Assessment

2

The Region documents raceway inspections for Unit 3 in two

'

Inspection Reports, 50-530/85-09 and 50-530/85-18, with no

significant findings.

The Regional reports cover 21 cable

tray runs and 4 conduit runs (less than half that reviewed

by the NRC CAT).

The Region's sample did not coincide with

the NRC CAT's inspection sample.

It is noted that of the

18 cable tray runs inspected in Inspection Report 50-530/

85-18, only 3 are identified as Class 1E installations.

,

The Regional CAT (50-528/83-34) conducted for Unit 1

inspected a much larger sample of racewa

several isolated separation violations. y and identified

The Region's

1

conclusion that raceway separation is not a prob 1 w. is

understandable based on the sample inspected.

Thirty pieces of electrical equipment including 19 panels

were inspected by the Region and the results reported in

,

'

Inspection Report 50-530/84-03.

Only two items coincided

with the NRC CAT sample, these were not ones with which the

NRC CAT had identified mounting deficiencies. The Region

i

,

had previously identified main panel mounting weld defi-

'

ciencies in Unit I and the results reported in Inspection

i

Report 50-528/82-25.

Both the' Region's previous findings

in this area cnd the high proportion (16 of 38) of items

i

identified by NB the NRC CAT and the licensee, seem to

.g.

.

_ _ . . _ _

.-_

-

_ _ _ . _ . -

,.

__

. _ .

,

.,

. . -

.

.

indicate that similar deficiencies in this area should have

been found by the Region's sample,

,

t

Only three cable tray supports are documented as being

inspected by the Region and IE personnel in Unit 3

(Inspection Report 50-530/85-09).

These supports were not

in the same plant areas as the five hangers with mounting

configuration problems identified by the NRC CAT.

However,

the Regional CAT conducted in Unit 1 did identify similar

weld configuration problems for hanger braces and Inspec-

tion Report 50-530/85-29 documents a record review of the

cable tray hanger reinspection efforts.

The 30 electrical items inspected by the Region, as

reported in Inspection Report 50-530/84-03, did include two

battery chargers, but did not include any of the emergency

'

diesel generator control cabinets.

Neither the current

inspection procedure nor the procedures used by the Region

include specific requirements for inspection of vendor

installed wiring or components.

As such, the Region's

,

inspection would not be expected to have identified the

vendor quality problems found by the NRC CAT in the battery

chargers or the diesel generator control panels.

The Region has inspected approximately 50 cables and as

many terminations for in process and final installation aad

!

have closed the applicable work observation inspection

i

procedures.

Their findings are consistent with and sup-

ported by the limited NRC CAT sample.

The inspection of

4

excore termination activities, found deficient b

CAT, was ongoing during the NRC CAT inspection. y the NRC

The Region

had not yet performed any inspection of these activities.

,

'

Instrumentation construction has been inspected by the

Region and reported in four Inspection Reports

l

(50-530/84-07,84-12,85-20 85-29

tion findings in this area a,re cons).

The NRC CAT inspec-

i

istent with the Region's

findings.

3.

Recommendations

,

t

The Region's implementation of the construction inspection

program in this area has been satisfactory.

'

The Region should place more attention in selecting for

examination primarily saftty-related components for which clear

.

'

regulatory requirements exist.

In addition, several CAT inspection followup areas are recom-

mended for future Regional emphasis.

These are:

verification

!

of the adequacy of the licensee's raceway separation inspec-

tions, verification of the licensee's corrective action for

i

4

equipment mounting, and verification of adequate documentation

'

for environmental qualification of wiring in motor operated

valves.

,

3

l

'

_ . _ .

_

. _ . _ _ , _ _ _

. _ .

.

.

-

1

,

B.

Mechanical Construction

.

1.

CAT Findings

The NRC CAT identified three instances of improper bolting

material for piping flanges.

The NRC CAT identified several instances of potential pipe

and pipe support interferences with adjacent structures

and components.

Undersized beam attachment load pins were found by the NRC

CAT to be used on pipe supportsfrestraints.

The NRC CAT identified numerous instances of loose,

missing or ineffective locknuts, cotter pins and locking

rings on pipe supports / restraints.

2.

Assessment

The various Region V inspections in the area of piping

have generally focused on welded pipe joints and piping

system configuration rather than bolted flange connections

or iriterferences.

'

The Region has reviewed at least 47 supports in Unit 3

(Inspection Reports 50-530/82-09, 84-07, 84-08, and 85-23)

.

and additional supports in Unit 1 in the Regional CAT

inspection in 1983.

Although welding and configuration

deficiencies were identified, no discrepancies were identi-

fied in pipe support load pins.

The Region's sample of

pipe supports inspected were not the same as those chosen by

the NRC CAT.

Therefort, it is understandable that the

Region had not identified this deficiency previously.

In the area of ineffective locking devices, the Region V

CAT inspection had identified this issue also. As a result

of the Regional CAT finding CAR S-83-56 was issued and a

reinspection program initiated.

This issue was closed in

Inspection Report 50-530/84-16 bassJ the licensee's broad

corrective actions.

However, based on the NRC CAT find-

ings, it appears that the licensee's corrective actions

have not been fully effective.

This issue of locking

devices seems to be one which continues to affect most

construction sites until the final construction stages and

work is essentially complete.

Although the issue is not

technically significant, additional licensee and Regional

attention will be necessary to assure that the issue is

satisfactorily resolved.

4

.

j

+

.

1

.

3.

Recommendations

%

.

l

'

In the area of bolted flange connections, piping system

interferences, and locking devices the Region should place

additional attention to ensure adequate inspection: coverage

and followup to the NRC CAT findings.

,

In the area of pipe support load pins the Regional inspec-

tion performance is considered satisfactory.

C.

Welding - NDE

1.

CAT Findings

'

Several examples were found by the NRC CAT in which

completed structural welds in pipe supports / restraints

were smaller than specified in the design drawings.

1he NRC CAT identified deficient welds in vendor supplied

instrument racks.

A number of radiographs were found which did not have the

required film quality.

The NRC CAT identified welds which had indications that

were not recorded as required by the licensee's Preservice

Examination (PSE) program.

The NRC CAT had several questions with regard to whether

I

some welding procedures adequately addressed ASME Code

provisions.

2.

Assessment

In the area of pipe support welding, the region has perfor-

med inspections of at least 47 supports (Inspection Reports

50-530/82-09, 84-07, 85-08, and 85-23) in Unit 3 and also

additional supports were inspected as part of the Regional

CAT inspection of Unit 1 in 1983.

The Regional CAT also

identified weld defciencies in pipe supports. The licen-

see's corrective actions to the Regional CAT findings

included a reinspection of a large sample of supports and

additional training and guidance for QC inspectors and

Field Engineers.

It was not determined whether the welding

deficiencies identified by the NRC CAT had occurred before

or after the reinspection and training activities.

1

With regard to the weld deficiencies identified in instru-

ment racks, the applicable inspection reports (50-530/

84-07, 84-12, 85-20, and 85-29) were reviewed and found to

J

address instrumentation installation and cable activities

including receiving inspections but not an independent

inspection of vendor supplied components.

The receiving

inspection records for two instrument ra-ks (not ones found

!

1

-5-

_ . _ _ .

_

_ _ _ _ _ .

__

_ _ . _ _ . ,

..

.

9

deficient by the NRC CAT) were inspected and documented in

Inspection Report 50-530/85-20; however, the actual instru-

.

ment rack hardware was not inspected.

In a related area of

vendor supplied equipment (fuel storage racks), -5e racks

were inspected by the Region and found to have wd discre-

pancies (Inspection Report 50-530/85-09).

The Region's inspections seem to have been performed in

accordance with the guidance provided in the applicable IE

inspection procedures.

The NRC CAT findings in the area of vendor radiographs not

meeting applicable requirements involved vendor supplied

components (shutdown heat exchangers and transfer tube-

housing).

The Region's focus of welding inspections

generally followed the prescribed activities in the inspec-

tion procedures.

The inspections were generally in the

area of piping and steel structures for on-site welding

activities.

The Regional CAT inspection did review vendor

radiographs; however, the radiographs selected were from

piping systems and not other types of components.

The Region has reviewed the area of PSE for Unit 3 in

Inspection Report 50-530/84-06.

In the area of PT examina-

tions in which the NRC CAT identified deficiencies, the

Region had witnessed PT examinations with no deficiencies

identified.

The Region's sample was not the same nor as

extensive as the NRC CAT inspection.

With regard to the NRC CAT questions on some welding

procedures, the Region had reviewed some of the same

welding procedures in Inspection Report 50-530/85-30 and

50-530/81-02.

Three of the seven welding procedures

reviewed by the Region were also reviewed by the NRC CAT.

The Region had not identified any deficiencies in the

welding procedures; however, the NRC CAT did identify

questions with regard to meeting the Code provisions for

impact tests done for procedure qualification and the

identification of nonessential variables.

It appears that

the Region had reviewed the appropriate procedures and

associated records; however, the inspector did not

I

describe in the inspection report how Code compliance was

met.

3.

Recommendations

'

Regional inspection:, were effective in identifying deficiencies

similar to those of the NRC CAT in pipe support welding.

The review of the Region's inspection of welding procedures

(the most recent one done one month before the NRC CAT inspec-

tion) indicates that the Region needs to describe in more detail

how code provisions are being met especially for circumstances

in which the normal or more routine Code criteria are not being

Although no violation of Code provisions were idem.if ted

met.

-6-

_

____a____

__..---a_-----

- .

-

a

-

- - - -

-

j

7

by the NRC CAT, a complex process was involved to ascertain Code

compliance.

D.

Civil and Structural Construction

1.

CAT Findings

Deficiencies were identified by the NRC CAT in the design,

construction, and inspection of masonry block walls.

The root

,

cause of the deficiencies appear to be the incorrect quality

{

classification orginally applied to these block walls.

'

i

2.

Assessment

1

The Region's inspections in the civil construction area

covered the areas of geotechnical, structural concrete,

containment post-tensioning, and structural steel. A

review of the inspection reports and 766 system data in

this area shows satisfactory performance of the

,

.

construction inspection program.

The Regional inspection (Inspection Report 50-530/83-06)

related to masonry walls was only to document the closure

of IE Bulletin 80-11 based on continuing correspondence

between NRR and the licensee associated with the NRR

l

generic letter requesting design information from the

licensee.

The Region performed essentially no inspection

t

'

of masonry walls at Palo Verde.

This is understandable for

a number of reasons.

First, the origin of the issue of

masonry walls was with IE Bulletin 80-11, which was addres-

sed only to operating facilities.

Construction sites were

to be included during the on going licensing review pro-

Although guidance for the inspection of IE Bulletin

cess.

80-11 was issued, the inspection guidance was not appli-

cable to construction sites.

Second, at the time of the

issuance of the NRR generic letter, NRR had not yet fully

developed the full acceptance criteria nor the full range

of design criteria to be addressed by the licensee (as now

established in the Standard Review Plan).

The Standard

Review Plan now requires the licensee to describe the

applicable QA/QC criteria used in the construction of

masonry walls.

Third, IE inspection procedures do not

address masonry construction.

In summary, as specific

guidance had not been provided to the Region for the

inspection of masonry construction, it is understandable

why this area did not receive Regional inspection atten-

tion.

3.

Recommendation

Generally the Region's implementation of the inspection program

in the civil area hat been satisfactory.

The Region should

continue to monitor the status of the masonry wall issue being

discussed between NRC and the licensee relating to Units 1, 2,

and 3.

-7-

.-

. . - _ -

.

.

_ _ . _-

.

. .

-

1.

i

E.

Material Traceability and Control

,

,

l

1.

CAT Findings

No significant deficiencies were identified in this area.

2.

Assessment

The Region has generally reviewed the area of material trace-

ability as part of inspections in the technical areas (i.e.,

mechanical, electrical, welding, and civil / structural).

In

addition, the overall area was reviewed in Inspection Report

50-530/81-02.

Based on the lack of significant findings in

this area, it appears that the Regional inspection effort has

been effective in ensuring adequate licensee performance in the

area of material traceability.

3.

Recommendations

1

-

No recommendations are necessary at this time.

F.

Design Change Control

}

1

1.

CAT Findings

,

'

A number of Field Change Requests (FCRs) appeared to have

an inadequate description of the reason (justification) for

-

the design change.

It was noted that ANPP Internal Proce-

dures Manual provides no guidance on when documented

justification for design changes is required, except for

changes affecting Pipe Stress and Supports (PS&S) calcula-

tions.

A similar finding had been made during at least one

licensee audit as reported in Corrective Action Report No.

CA-84-0351, Aprii 22, 1985.

Several instances were identified in which a design charge

was made and referenced to a specific design document

without changes being made to other affected design docu-

ments.

,

,

2.

Assessment

The Regional inspections in this area (Inspection Reports

i

50-530/81-02, 84-04, and 84-07) generally identified no signifi-

cant deficiencies, except some in the N-5 program. The joint IE

and Region V inspection (Inspection Report 50-530/85-09) identi-

fled similar deficiencies as the NRC CAT inspection.

The NRC CAT and joint IE and Region V inspections did concen-

trate efforts specifically in the design change area and

reviewed substantially more design change documents than the

Region.

The magnitude of the deficiencies identified by the

NRC CAT in this area is not considered to be significant.

-8-

..-.

.

--

-

-- - _.

.- .

- .

.

Therefore, based on the above, it is reasonable to expect that

the Region would have concluded that there were no significant

deficiencies in the design change area.

3.

Recommendations

The Regional inspection efforts are considered satisfactory in

this area, therefore no recommendations are made at this time.

G.

Corrective Action Systems

1.

CAT Findings

No significant deficiencies were identified by the NRC CAT in

this area, except in the area of cable tray hangers which is

discussed in Section III.A above.

2.

Assessment

The Region has periodically reviewed the licensee's Corrective

Action programs by various approaches (i.e. , QA program

reviews, followup to Notices of Violation, followup to licensee

identified items and followup to licenrec audits and

surveillances). ,The Region appears to .iave been effective in

assuring adequate licensee performance.

3.

Recommendations

No recommendations are made at this time.

IV.

REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM AT PALO VERDE UNIT 3

A.

Scope

,

Inspection staff hours for Palo Verde Unit 3 reported to the 766

system starting January 1,1975 through December 31 1985 and

existing in the system as of March 20, 1986,

with inspection report numbers, inspection dates, inspectionwere

procedures used, and data on completion and status.

The above data

is sumarized in Attachments II and III.

Attachment II contains a

summary of the inspection staff hours and completion status of the

MC 2512 construction inspection program for Palo Verde Unit 3 and

Attachment III is a more detailed presentation of the inspection

history by technical areas developed from the 766 system data base.

A sampling of inspection reports prepared by the Region were

evaluated with respect to content, timely issuance and overall

completeness.

The total inspection hours discussed in this section are slightly

different than those discussed in Section II above due to the

difference in dates that the 766 system information was requested.

-9

,

-_.

_

~.

.

_

.

, . _ . - _ . _ _ _ _ _

.

l

B.

Assessment

A distribution of inspection procedures by the reported degree of

'

,

completion (Section A of Attachment II) indicates that the construc-

tion inspection program for Palo Verde Unit 3 is comparable to the

construction status of the site.

Eighty-three percent of the MC 2512

procedures are closed at 100 percent completion with only seven

percent of the procedures between 26 and 99 percent complete.

Our evaluation shows a total of 3990 staff hours in the 766 system

(as of March 29,1986) devoted to construction inspection of Palo

Verde Unit 3.

The hours have been grouped into 17 inspection areas

(Section B of Attachment II).

The breakdown of inspection hours into

inspection areas indicates most areas have had adequate attention

with a fairly equitable distribution of effort. However, it also

indicates two areas which may warrant additional attention by the

Region to determine whether inspection efforts have adequately

covered tne area.

In the areas of containment penetrations and

inservice and preservice inspection it appears that the inspection

'

hours expended thus far are relatively low in comparison with the

plant's construction status.

The contributions of the CAT inspection

)

in these areas should improve the number of inspection hours

'

reflected in the 766 system. These findings have been discussed with

the Regional Office and they have generally acknowledged them and will

be evaluating their records to ensure inspection coverage.

The listing of 15 significant inspection procedures with no hours

charged against them (Section C of Attachment II) shows that five of

the procedures have been closed by the Region. This seems to indi-

cate that the Region has evaluated the requirements for these proce-

dures and has determined that the requirements have been satisfied.

It was noted that the four instrumentation cable procedures with no

hours include those for procedures and records review and one proce-

dure for the work observation inspection.

Our review of Inspection

Report 50-530/84-07, shows that procedures had been reviewed, however

j

the procedures and records reviews were documented against the

electrical cable procedures, rather than instrumentation.

With respect to the division of staff inspection hours into the

three major inspection areas of program / procedure review, work

observation, and record review, the majority was devoted to work

observation (65% of the inspection hours), while 9% and 25% were

spent on procedures and records respectively (Section D of Attachment

II). The percentages are as expected due to the desired emphasis on

work observation and the fact that procedure reviews for later units

of a multi-unit site would generally be for changes to the proce-

dures.

The review of the inspection reports for Palo Verde Unit 3 indicates

generally 9000 conformance with MC 0610 in terms of content, timeli-

ness of report issuance and overall completeness. A review of a

sample of reports issued over the past year (1985) indicates that

the reports are well written and detailed and have adequate technical

depth. It was noted that the inspection reports now include a

- 10 -

,

description of the applicable inspection procedures as suggested by

MC 0610 and last year's regional assessment.

In addition, the

inspection reports generally provide clarification on which unit or

units is being referenced (an exception being Inspection Report

'

50-530/85-14, which does not clearly define the applicable unit,

A

check of 12 inspection reports (regional and resident inspector

inspections) shows an average of 18 days for issuance of the report.

This is within the 20 day guideline stated in MC 0610.

This is a

marked improvement from last year's assessment which found that

average to be 39 days for report issuance.

We note in our review of some electrical and instrumentation

inspection reports that the sample of components to be inspected

have not been as expected.

Inspection Reports 50-530/84-12, 85-18

and 85-20 describe 18 cable tray segments reviewed, however 15 were

non-Class IE installations and 21 HVAC instruments inspected with 10

being aonsafety related.

Also, the instrumentation selected in

safety-related applications have been only in the HVAC area.

We

note also that the inspections in the instrumentation area are not

yet completed.

-

C.

R_ecommendations

The information reviewed, which was current as of March 20, IL6,

indicates that the Region has generally followed the construction

inspection program in MC 2512.

Weaknesses discussed in last years

assessment seem to have been effectively corrected. We note that

two areas may require additional Regional inspection attention

(containment penetrations and inservice and preservice inspection).

In the electrical and instrumentation area, the selection of compo-

nents to be inspected should be focused more towards safety related

items and a broader category of instrumentation.

V.

SALP REPORTS

An analysis was made of the three most recent SALP reports, for the

periods July 1981 - February 1983, March 1983 - March 1984, and April

1984 - September 1985, for those areas that were common to both the SALP

and CAT inspection.

It was noted that the SALP ratings did not distin-

guish between the units at the Palo Verde site.

Generally, the licensee

has been rated by the Region as Category 2 in the construction areas with

only one Category 3 rating (in support systems) and six Category 1 ratings

for the three SALP periods reviewed (a total of 20 individual ratings).

Generally, the CAT inspection findings are consistent with and reinforce

the latest SALP ratings and recommendations in the construction area.

This was particularly evident in two areas.

In the area of the thorough-

ness of engineering evaluations, the NRC CAT also noted a lack of compre-

hensiveness in the evaluation of welding deficiencies for the mounting of

electrical panels and also in the lack of technical justification for

several design changes.

In the area of attention to subcontractors, the

NRC CAT did identify several vendor supplied equipment deficiencies,

i.e. , deficient welding on instrument racks, poor radiography quality and

documentation, and inadequate electrical panel terminations.

- 11 -

- - - _ - -

-

.

n-

_

.

.

.

1

i

.

In one area there appears to be based on the CAT findings, a declining

trend which may require additional licensee and Regional attention.

The

NRC CAT has identified several deficiencies in the piping and pipe support

area which were not previously identified by the licensee.

These defi-

ciencies were undersized load pins on pipe supports; improper bolting

materials in piping flanges; unrecorded indications in the Preservice

Examination program; and questions relating to the adequacy of some

Bechtel welding procedures.

It is noted that the Region has expanded 601

.

hours of inspection in this area (Units 1, 2, and 3).

The Region should

continue to closely monitor activities in this area.

In the area of Support Systems, it was noted that the 1981-1983 SALP Board

had recommended increased NRC inspection in the HVAC area.

During the

SALP period some portion of 115 hours0.00133 days <br />0.0319 hours <br />1.901455e-4 weeks <br />4.37575e-5 months <br /> had been devoted to HVAC inspection.

In the next SALP period, March 1983 - March 1984, although the SALP

reports only one inspection was performed in this area,164 hours0.0019 days <br />0.0456 hours <br />2.71164e-4 weeks <br />6.2402e-5 months <br /> of

inspection were expended.

Based on this inspection and the indication of

a lack of effective corrective actions, the licensee was given d Category

3 assessment. The next SALP report for April 1984 - September 1985, shows

j

207 inspection hours in this area during this period.

However, it appears

that the evaluation of the licensee's performance in this area was based

on an incorrectly assumed Category 2 rating in the previous SALP period,

i

The actual rating had been Category 3.

The NRC CAT findings in this area

indicated no significant deficiencies.

Based on the NRC CAT findings in

this area, it appears that the Region has been effective in obtaining

satisfactory licensee performance.

However, the Region s ould pay closer

attention to previous SALP ratings to ensure an accurate appraisal and the

identification of trends.

]

,

VI.

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF 198y

The Region was provided an assessment last year in a memorandum from J.

Partlow to D. Kirsch dated June 19, 1985.

This assessment reviewed the

implementation of the construction inspection program at Palo Verde Unit

3 for the period February 1984 through March 1985.

The Region's implemen-

tation of the inspection program was considered acceptable, however, a few

items required additional Regional attention or evaluation.

l

Our review of the inspection reports and 766 data shows that the Region

has markedly improved their inspection performance and has generally

{

satisfied the comments and suggestions of the June 1985 assessment.

Specifically, the Region addressed the assessment comments as follows:

,

)

l

(1) Inspection procedures were reviewed and followup inspections

conducted where necessary for those cases in which inspection credit

for Unit 3 were taken for inspections conducted for Unit 1 or 2;

(2) Increased inspection coverage was accomplished for the period

February-September 1985 (927 inspection hours documented);

(3) The documented use of the current inspection procedures has

increased;

i

(4) Inspection reports are being issued in a timely manner generally

within the guidelines of MC 0610; and

i

- 12 -

,

.

_

_ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_

_ _ . _ _ i

-

-

.

.

(5) The inspection reports are now referencing the applicable inspection

procedures and unit being inspected against.

VII. OVERALL ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS

A review of the Palo Verde Unit 3 inspection reports, SALP reports, and

766 Computer System data indicates that generally the construction inspec-

tion program and inspection procedures have been satisfactorily imple-

mented. Overall the inspection reports were well written with the neces-

sary scope, depth, and technical content and on the average were issued

within the suggested time period.

In one instance it was noted that the

inspection findings were not well documented to be able to evaluate how

,

ASME Code requirements were being met.

In addition, the Region should pay

closer attention to the sample selected for inspection to ensure that the

j

sample is primarily safety related installations and that instrumentation

is selected from the various process systems.

Two areas require additional

l

i

attention to ensure that inspection procedures in the areas of containment

penetrations and in-service / pre-service inspection have, or will, receive

adequate inspection coverage.

During our review of the Region's implementation of the IE construction

inspection program, the inspection program procedures were informally

evaluated.

In general, the inspection procedures were adequate, however,

the CAT findings suggest additional refinements.

Specifically these

(1) in the electrical area, review of vendor workmanship in instal-

are:

l

led equipment; (2) in the welding /NDE area, review of vendor supplied

components; and (3) in the civil area, review of masonry wall construc-

tion.

i

The review of the CAT and Regional inspection findings shows general

agreement.

It is recommended that the Region place additional attention

on the corrective actions to the NRC CAT findings in the areas of electri-

I

cal raceway separation, electrical equipment mounting, and masonry walls.

A review of the three most recent SALP reports indicates that the CAT

inspection findings are consistent with and reinforce the latest SALP

i

ratings and recommendations in the construction area. The four CAT

findings in the area of piping and pipe supports seem to indicate that

closer attention by the Region and licensee may be necessary.

The Region

should pay closer attention to previous SALP ratings to ensure accurate

{

appraisals and identification of trends.

The Region has satisfactorily implemented the recommendations and comments

of last year's assessment.

The Region's efforts were clearly evident in

our review of inspection reports and the 766 system data.

Overall, the Regional efforts to oversee the construction activities of

Palo Verde Unit 3 are satisfactory and the implementation of the inspec-

tion program procedures was also satisfactory.

i

- 13 -

-

-

..

.

. - -

,.

. . - - - .

.-

_-

-

,.

_.

_

_ _ _

._

. _ _ _ . . _

.

.

APPENDIX A

EXECUTIVE StM4ARY

An announced NRC Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) inspection was conducted at

Arizona Public Service Company's Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS)

Unit 3 during the period January 13-24 and February 3-14, 1986.

OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

-

Hardware and documentation for construction activities were generally in

accordance with requirements and licensee commitments. However, the NRC CAT did

identify a number of hardware deficiencies that in most cases have resulted from

construction program weaknesses. These include:

1.

Masonry walls which support and are adjacent to safety-related components

were found by the NRC CAT to have the reinforcing bars not placed in accord-

ance with the design drawings.

In addition, prescribed inspection records

we n not available to document the adequacy of the masonry wall construction

proevss and to support design analysis assumptions. This was due in part to

the fact that the origir,al quality classification of the masonry walls was

incorrect. The masonry walls were classified as Class S which requires no

special quality requirements beyond industry standards. This area will

require further review by the NRC.

2.

In the mounting of electrical components, 6 of 11 pieces of QC accepted

equipment and 5 of 32 QC accepted cable tray hangers were found with weld

configurations that did not match specified requirements.

In addition,

the cable tray hangers had been subject to plant wide reinspection programs

for previously identified attachment design deficiencies.

I

3.

Based on field observation of work activity, discussions with site

engineering and Westinghouse personnel, and a review of data which

describes failures and detector leakage experienced on PVGNS Units 1

and 2, NRC CAT inspectors concluded that the existing quality verification

program was not adequate to assure that critical ex-core termination

activities are satisfactorily accomplished. Based upon NRC CAT concerns,

the applicable QC procedure was revised to specifically detail those

i

steps for which QC inspection is required.

4.

Several deficiencies in vendor equipment were identified. These were vendor

deficiencies related to terminations in the diesel generator control panels

and soldered connections in the 125V DC battery chargers and had not been

identified during source inspection, receipt inspection, or field installa-

tion activities.

In addition, vendor weld deficiencies were found in

instrument racks.

AREAS INSPECTED AND RESULTS

Electrical and Instrumentation Construction

In general, the electrical and instrumentation in'sta11ations examined were found

to confors to applicable design and installation requirements. However, several

areas with hardware deficiencies were identified.

A-1

-- -.

. - - _ - - _ _ _ -

. - . -

-

- . -

- - .

-.

__

.

- - - . - .

.

. -

.

. . .

e

.

.

A number of raceway installations were found not meeting the required separation

criteria. However, the major efforts of the licensee's inspection program for

separation of Class 1E raceway installations is not

This area

will require additional.NRC and licensee attention. yet complete.

Configuration deficiencies were identified in some cable tray hanger connections

and the mounting welds for some electrical panels.

Five QC accepted cable tray

hangers were found with weld connections not matching the configuration of

approved designs. A large percentage (6 of 11 panels inspected) of QC accepted

equipment was found to exhibit deficient mounting configurations. The mounting

weld configurations were not in accordance with the approved design documents.

The quality of vendor terminations it, the diesel generator control panels and

i

125V de battery chargers was found to be inadequate.

The field QC verification of in process excore terminations was found to be

1

inadequate and requires additional licensee attention.

The status of qualification for several components of the diesel generator control

panels and some wire types in motor operated valves requires additional NRC and

l

licensee review.

Mechanical Construction

Preventive maintenance of mechanical equipment was found to be in conformance

with requirements and good maintenance practices. Heating, ventilating and air

conditioning hardware (supports / restraints, duct sections, fire dampers) were

generally found to be installed in accordance with requirements or the deficien-

cies found by the NRC CAT had been previously identified. However, deficiencies

were identified in three areas: piping, pipe supports / restraints, and mechanical

equipment.

In the area of piping, improper material was used for flange bolting.

Undersized beam attachment load pins were used on pipe supports / restraints.

Mounting hardware and foundations on some HVAC equipment were found to be

-

j

fabricated and installed improperly. These areas of concern require further

i

licensee evaluation.

Weldino and Nondestructive Examination

Welding and nondestructive examination activities were generally found to be

conducted in accordance with the governing codes and specifications.

However,

several examples were found in which completed structural welds in pipe supports /

restraints were smaller than that specified in the design drawings. Some vendor

supplied tanks and heat exchangers were found to have undersized weld reinforce-

ment in "nozzle to shell" and sanway to shell" joints.

In addition, deficient

welds were found in vendor supplied instrument racks.

The NRC CAT inspectors also found a number of vendor radiographs which did not

have the required fils quality.

In the area of Preservice Examination activities,

the NRC CAT identified welds which had indications that had not been recorded as

required by the licensee's program.

In the review of some wlding procedures, timely information was not provided

to adequately determine whether the procedures property addressed ASME Code

provisions in the areas of impact tests of the heat affected zene, the identi-

fication of non-essentiel welding variables, and the prohibition of peening in

certain situations.

A-2

.

,

_.

__

.

.

. .

.

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

.

.

Civil and Structural Construction

In the area of masonry block walls, the NRC CAT identified that prescribed

in-process inspections had not been perfomed.

It was also identified that

reinforcing bars were not positioned as required by the design drawings.

The design and construction adequacy of the block walls will require further

.

review by the NRC.

Structural steel installation was determined to be generally adequate. Deficient

bolted connections were found by the. NRC CAT in containment column splice

connections. Design considerations for thermal loading on structural steel

members will require further review by the NRC.

QC documentation for concrete placements, mechanical splices of reinforcing steel,

containment post-tensioned tendons, and structural backfill were generally deter-

ained to be adequate.

Material Traceability and Control

The material traceability and control program is considered 'to be satisfactory.

No significant deficiencies were idsntified in the sample of items selected for

review by the NRC CAT. Documentation was available to indicat. that materials

were installed as specified.

Design Change Control

Design change control was determined to be generally in conformance with

applicable requirements. The most significant findings were the lack of docu-

mented, auditable justification for some safety-related design changes and failure

to assure that design changes were made to all affected design documents in a

timely manner.

Corrective Action Systems

In general the licensee's corrective action program was found to be acceptable.

However, in the area of cable tray support attachment configuration the licen-

see's program has not been effective as evidenced by additional examples of

configuration deficiencies found by the NRC CAT after several licensee

reinspection programs.

.

A-3

_

.

..

-

--

_

.

.

...

-

.-

_ _ _ .

__ _

_____

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

i

.

APPENDIX B

POTENTIAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

As a result of the NRC CAT inspection of January 13-24 and February 3-14, 1986

,

at the Palo Verde site, the following items are being referred to Region V as

Potential Enforcement Actions.

Section references are to the detailed portion

of the inspection report.

.

1.

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, as implemented by Arizona Public

Service (APS), Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Final Safety

Analysis Report (FSAR) Section 17.1A.3, requires that measures shall.be

established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements and design

basis are correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures,

and instructions.

Contrary to the above, at the time of this inspection, the licensee's program

was not adequately implemented in that masonry block walls were incorrectly

classified as Quality Class S for which no special quality requirements

beyond industry standards are needed.

Partially due to the "S" quality

classification, in process inspections were not accomplished. As a result,

reinforcing steel was found to be located not in accordance with the design

drawings and also inspection records were not available to support design

analyses assumptions. Therefore, masonry walls may not meet their design

intent.

(Section V.B.1)

2.

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion VII, as implemented by the APS FSAR

Section 17.1A.7, requires in part that measures shall be established to

assure that purchased material, equipment, and services conform to purchase

documents.

Contrary to the above, at the time of this inspection, the NRC CAT inspec-

tors found several deficiencies in vendor supplied components as follows:

Several installed Class 1E components exhibited poor workmanship and

a.

inadequate vendor product quality. These include inadequate solder

connections in the de ba'ttery chargers and damaged and broken terminal

lugs in the diesel generator control panels. (Sections II.B.2.b(4) and

II.B.3.b.(6))

l

.

b.

Instrument racks had various weld deficiencies such as incomplete

fusion, missing or undersized welds, and weld spatter. (Section IV.B.5)

Some vendor supplied radiographs did not have the required fils quality.

c.

(SectionIV.B.11)

3.

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion X, as implemented by the APS FSAR

Section 17.1A.10, requires that a program for inspection of activities

affecting quality be established and executed to verify conformance with the

documented instructions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing the

activity.

,

,

Contrary to the above, at the time of this inspection, the licensee's

inspection programs were not effectively implemented in that:

b-1

.

-

-

- - - - . , _ - - --- -

- _ - - _ - , _ . - - . _ _ _ _ .

l

1,1

.

.

l

.

.

$

a.

Four instances of undersized beam attachment load pins were identified

on two ASME Class 1 pipe supports and two Class R pipe supports contrary

to design drawings and vendor catalogs.

(Section III.B.2)

b.

Improper bolting materials were identified on flange connections in

piping installations.

(Section III.B.1)

c.

Six of eleven pieces of QC accepted Class 1E equipment sounted by

welding had mounting configurations which were not in accordance with

the applicable design or specified installation requirements.

In

.

addition, 5 of 32 QC accepted cable tray hangers were found with welded

connection configurations that were not in accordance with the appli-

cable installation requirements.

(Sections II.B.1.b.(3), II.8.3.b.(4),

(6) and (7))

i

l

1

-

B-2

.

_.

- - -

.

_

__ _ . _ _ . _

. .

_ , _ _ . _ _ - . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . .

. _ _ _ _ .

MC 2512 INSPECTION HOURS

COMPARISON OF PV-3 TO OTHER PIANTS

7-

6692

g

6-

D

5-

(4845 Avg)

,

-

,

o_

2-

~2MMM

PV-2

PV-3

B-2

C-2

COMPARISON PIANTS

PV-2

Palo Verde 2

B-2

Byron 2

PV-3

Palo Verde 3

C-2

Catawba 2

,

.

ATTACHMENT II

766 DATA SUMMARY

MC 2512 STATUS OF PALO VERDE UNIT 3

Summary of Inspection Procedures (IPs) used versus procedures specified in MC 2512, and staffhours expended and distributions.

Based on 766 Computer System

data as of March 20, 1986.

A.

Distribution of IPs by Degree of Completion

Percent Completion

No.

Percent

Less than 25%

14

11

26-50%

4

3

51-75%

2

2

76-99%

2

2

100%

102

83

124

101 (due to rounding error)

B.

Total Hours per Inspection Area for MC 2512

Inspection Area

Hours

Percentage

Management Meetings

139

3

Quality Assurance

144

4

Design and As-Built

270

7

Geotechnical

34

<1

Structural Concrete

132

3

Structural Steel / Supports

154

4

Piping

187

5

Mechanical Components

504

13

Electrical

413

10

Instrumentation

186

5

Containment Penetrations

29

<1

Welding /NDE

263

7

Containment Test

0

0

Inservice and Freservice Inspection

38

1

Followup

661

16 .

Independent Inspection

811

20

Miscellaneous

25

<1

MW

W

11-1

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

,-.

- . . . .

-.

1

'

.

.

C.

Significant IPs with no Hours Reported

Management Meetings

30051B*

Structural Concrete

47061B*

Mechnical Components

500558

500618

50065B

50074B*

Instrumentation

52061B

52064B

52065B

52066B

Welding and NDE

55071B

55073B

55171B*

55178B*

Containment Test

63050B

,

  • These IPs are reported to be 100 percent complete and closed with no

inspection bours.

This indicates completion of the inspection

requirements through a different basis.

D.

Number of Phase 2 (Construction) IPs Used and Total Hours

Program

No. of IPs Used

Total Inspection Hours

MC 2512

136

3990

IP Scope

Hours

Percentage

Procedure Review

174

9

Work Observation

1211

65

Records Review

469

25

1554

~II-(due to rounding error)

I

.

t

II-2

_

..

.

.

.

._

-

... - .- . - -- -.... -

_.

-.

.

ATTACHMENT III

INSPECTION PROGRAM HISTORY FOR PALO VERDE 3

(JANUARY 1,1985 - DECEMBER 31, 1985)

'

A.

Civil and Structural Procedures

Reported

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hours

Completion

Status

1.

Geotechnical

45051B

1

4

100

C

45053B

1

3

45055B

2

17

100

C

46051B

1

1

100

C

)

46053C

3

8

100

C

46055B

1

1

100

C

]

2.

Structural Concrete

47051B

4

17

100

C

'

47053B

5

26

100

C

47053C

10

39

,

47054B

3

14

100

C

47055B

4

10

100

C

i

47056B

1

2

100

C

47061B

1

100

C

-

47063B

1

17

90

l

47063C

1

3

100

C

'

47065B

1

4

100

C

3.

Structural Steel / Supports

48051B

2

4

100

C

480538

4

19

75

C

43053C

8

29

48055B

2

43

100

C

48061B

1

1

100

C

48063B

1

6

100

C

48063C

2

4

48064B

1

6

100

C

480658

2

42

100

C

d

III-1

.

B.

Mechanical Construction Procedures

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hours

_ Completion

Status

1.

Piping

49051B

1

2

100

C

49053B

2

56

100

C

49054B

1

8

100

C

49055B

1

19

100

C

49061B

1

2

100

C

490638

4

44

100

C

49063C

4

14

49065

1

42

100

C

2.

Mechanical Components

50051B

1

1

100

C

50053B

5

22

100

C

50053C

2

4

50055

1

12

40

50063B

1

55

100

C

50071

1

16

100

C

50073

1

70

100

50073B

2

201

100

C

50073C

8

31

50074B

1

100

C

-

50075

1

56

100

C

50090B

4

42

100

C

50095

1

38

75

50100

2

6

100

C

C.

Electrical and Instrumentation Construction Procedures

1.

Electrical

51051

1

100

C

-

51051B

1

35

100

C

51053B

2

31

100

P

51054B

1

15

100

C

51055

1

56

100

C

51061

1

20

100

C

510638

2

47

100

P

51064B

4

105

100

C

51065

1

104

100

C

d

2.

Instrumentation

52051

2

22

100

C

52053

2

94

80

52055

1

8

50

52063B

1

62

100

C

III-2

.

.

.

O.

Containment Penetration Procedures

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hcurs

Completion

Status

53051B

1

8

100

0

53053B

3

13

100

C

53053C

1

4

53055B

1

4

100

C

E.

Welding and NDE Proceduces

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hours

Completion

Status

55051B

2

4

100

C

55053B

3

10

100

C

55053C

3

19

100

C

550558

1

6

100

C

.

55061B

1

1

100

C

55063B

1

1

100

C

55063C

1

3

100

C

55064B

1

1

100

C

55065B

1

5

100

C

55066B

1

5

100

C

55073C

1

6

100

C

55075B

1

3

100

C

55081B

1

8

100

C

55083B

1

2

100

C

55083C

3

14

100

C

550858

1

2

100

C

55093B

1

14

100

C

l

55151B

2

3

100

C

55152B

2

3

100

C

55153B

5

27

100

C

<

55154B

2

1

100

C

55155B

4

13

100

C

'

55156B

1

3

100

C

55157B

3

8

100

C

55158B

1

2

100

C

55171B

1

100

C

-

'

55172B

1

4

100

C

55173B

3

8

100

C

55175B

1

12

100

C

551768

1

8

100

C

551778

3

7

100

C

55178B

1

100

C

-

55181B

1

4

100

C

55182B

3

6

100

C

55183B

6

8

100

C

55185B

3

24

100

C

551868

2

5

100

C

'

551878

3

4

100

C

55188B

2

9

100

C

III-3

>

_

__

--

-.

_ . _ .

_ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _

_

. _ . .

, _ _ _ _

.

.

.

F.

Inservice /Preservice Inspection Procedures

'

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hours

Completion

Status

73051B

1

9

100

C

,

730528

1

12

100

C

!

73053B

1

5

40

73055B

1

12

40

'

G.

Followup Procedures

3

t

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hours

Completion

Status

92061B

3

27

!

92700

4

77

'

92700B

22

183

92700C

2

2

'

,

92701B

19

139

,

92702

2

15

92702B

5

24

92702C

1

1

92703

3

8

927038

7

23

92703C

1

1

i'

92704B

1

30

92705B

6

125

!

.

92705C

1

6

'

H.

Independent Inspection Procedures

!

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hours

Completion

Status

l

,

92706

2

114

92706B

56

562

92706C

23

135

-

,

i

'

l

III-4

.

1

___,_ _ _

_

_

. _ _ _ _ , _ . . . .

, . _ _ . . .

_ - - ._...

. - . .

.

.

.

.

I.

Miscellaneous Procedures

.

Procedure

Number of

Total Staff

Percent

Reported

Number

Inspections

Hours

Completion

._ Status

1.

Meetings, QA, and Design and As-Built

25A11P

2

6

100

C

25C11P

1

7

25124B

3

12

30051B

1

100

C

-

30702B

5

23

30703B

61

22

30703C

22

23

35020B

2

13

100

C

35060

3

19

100

C

35060B

1

5

-

-

35061

1

30

103

C

35061B

1

25

-

-

35065B

3

28

100

C

35100B

1

2

100

C

35200B

1

22

100

C

37051

1

25

20

37051B

2

190

100

C

37055B

3

55

100

C

,

I

III-5

,

-

, - , ,

e ,- ,- - - - -

--

,

-

, _ _ , , . - , ,

,e,,.,,,g,

.,,_,

aper

--=-ww.

--,n-,

,

, , . - , , , , , , ,

_